Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > From: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> > > The --notes and --ref parameter for selecting which notes ref to operate > on are based off of expand_notes_ref functionality. The documentation > mentioned that an unqualified ref argument would be taken as under > `refs/notes/`. However, this does not clearly indicate that > `refs/heads/master` will expand to `refs/notes/refs/heads/master`, so > document this behavior. > > Add a further test for the expected behavior of git notes --ref > refs/heads/master get-ref as well, to ensure future patches do not break > this assumption. > > Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@xxxxxxxxx> > --- Looks OK to a cursory read, but I find "even if it is qualified under some other location" a bit tiring to read without adding much value. To readers who consider "other" in that phrase to be clear enough (i.e. "location other than refs/notes"), it is totally redundant. To other readers who feel "other" in that phrase to be under qualified (i.e. "location other than what???"), it is not informative enough. Middle-ground readers who would not know if "refs/a" is inside or outside some "other" location, it is confusing. After all, "a/b" is qualified under some location (i.e. a/) other than "refs/notes/", and it does mean "refs/notes/a/b". How about phrasing it totally differently? The ref specifies the full refname when it begins with `refs/notes/`; otherwise `ref/notes/` is prefixed to form a full name of the ref. I think that would remove the need to illustrate with concrete examples like refs/heads/blah. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html